User talk:Lirielle/Style Guides/Set Pages
Before we start writing guidelines on the /Doc page, here are some points that we need to decide: ;Category:Set : Historically put on top of some page. This is inconsistent with all other pages. ;first section heading: many pages repeat the set name as a heading for the component table, which looks very odd. Some have "Set Name Elements", which better reflects the contents of the section. ;item table (1st section): here, we have room to write effects at full length ('+10 to Critical Hits'), so we could reflect the actual text if we want, but I suggest we just copy effects from item pages as has always been done. ;item table row titles: Some pages use Item type (Level) Item name, when other use Item type Level Item name. Another inconsistency. ;item table order: widely inconsistent. Preferred order should be that of the Set page, ie. alphabetical: Amulet, Belt, Boots, Cloak, Hat, Ring, Shield, Weapon. ;complete set effects: in the /Doc, we souhld list all possible effects and where they should go ;other sections: ;Crafting: I've added it, but we need to decide whether a) to remove it (I find it superfluous and hard to read) or b) to keep it but then there are plenty of pages that are missing this section as most sets are now craftable. --Lirielle 11:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC) :Category at top is to avoid been remove due to ppl adding notes or removing actual notes, first section is for the same reasons to protect the category page. :Items table, not sure where they use shortcuts for that unless you are talking about the weapons. :item table row titles : bad copy paste from ppl it should be Item type (Level) Item name :Item table order same bad copy paste from ppl it should be as stated except for pets that apear above the weapon. :compleat set effects dont get this. :Crafting i say it should stay ppl keep adding that information and i thought it was pointless until i wanted to craft various full set and the list help me plan the material gathering, with out having to manually copy across 5/7 pages the items then reorder alphabetically and then start crunching the numbers so could know how many mats i need, the profession i guess it could go since all sets became craftable there is no more partial set drops and partial crafts. :--Cizagna (Talk) 12:17, 31 December 2007 (UTC) and now the doc Ok so now the doc: The introduction seems pointless as a start since it displays as and introduction and ppl will fill that, should be work as a "lead section" as it is its proper name. Trivia its trivial and perfectly can be contain inside notes since at max it would use 1 or 2 lines, also history and crafting as a section is rather pointless since there is NOTOC and the set pieces information already push all that to the bottom. If crafting materials list is going to be a table then it should be break down in columns so it uses less vertical space and should be order by default as we have been doing. --Cizagna (Talk) 14:16, 3 January 2008 (UTC) :Merged intro with first section :Having separate sections for Notes, History, Crafting and Trivia is a question of organizing the article and having a neat layout. Not having a TOC doesn't mean we shouldn't have sections ;). An important point here is consistency with other types of pages, where the Notes section can be long so it's a good idea IMVHO to have separate sections for specific aspects. For sets, notes would be on suggested combinations, partial sets etc. The History section is sth I've had in mind for a long time and I think should be implemented to bring in some order. This section would list name changes, nerfs, etc. This could help avoid ppl adding 'Edit: this is no longer true...' notes. Notes would be simply updated to the latest facts and major changes would be summarized for the record in the History section. Crafting is obvious to me since this section can be quite large. Trivia is a separate section on other pages so I suggest being consistent. :I grouped all the above optional sections to have a clearer structure. :Having the crafting section formatted into a table is much nicer to me, but I agree that it makes it longer. We could easily reduce the row heights and even use a smaller font size, but I'm puzzled how we could easily and logically split it in several columns? :As a side note, did you notice that I changed the 'Complete Set Effect' title to Complete Set Effects as the plural seems logical? Do you agree with this change? And is the rest OK? :--Lirielle 15:11, 3 January 2008 (UTC) Class Set Effects These are currently a mess as regards the way they are written. Not only are we inconsistent in the use of links, but Ankama themselves are inconsistent in their descriptions. I've compiled a list of the different descriptions (disregardiung the links) and suggest the following standards. 1st column is for the Set page. 2nd column is for Item pages, where we have less space and other requirements. --Lirielle 11:18, 12 January 2008 (UTC)